DUST Search - [Feedback] Pokey's Feels on the Warbarge

All Channels

Feedback/Requests

[Feedback] Pokey's Feels on the Warbarge

» Click here to find additional results for this topic using Google

Monitor this thread via RSS [?]

Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

Author	Thread Statistics \| Show CCP posts - 0 post(s)
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4787	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:06:00 - [1] - Quote This might be a couple posts long, because you know...I try to be concise and it turns into the Great Wall of Text. Please be kind and don't post until I'm done So I've kind of been voicing in on several different threads, but I figured I might as well make my own to put it all in one spot. First of all, I love the idea of the Warbarge, I think it will prove to be an amazing tool for future systems and hope that it proves to do so in future updates. However I do have some key concerns with the implementation of some of the systems, how players interact with them, and some aspects of the monetization. I mean no disrespect in this post, as I've made it clear in the past (and still believe) that Ratatti and team do a fantastic job at the game. So please don't take my points as passive aggressive....simply concerned and hoping to help provide a more enjoyable experience for everyone. Passive vs Active Essentially every aspect of the Warbarge runs entirely off a timer. You wait to gain components. You spend the components. And then you wait for it to cool down so you do it again. I do not feel like I personally have any means to affect my Warbarge, save from the rather rare instance where components will drop from a battle. While I think limitations are good to an extent as it does prevent people from playing the game an excessive amount and thus plowing through the content too quickly...it has been taken too far in this instance. For example, our SP system as you know is a hybrid of passive SP gain and active SP gain. The passive side is nice in that it allows players to guarantee some level of benefit regardless of play, and the active side allows players to improve the rate at which benefit is gained by actually playing the game. The Active SP has a soft cap, to again prevent people from excessively grinding through the content at an unintended rate. I think that in general this hybrid system is quite good and provides a wonderful middle ground in terms of how player progression happens. However the Warbarge takes a nearly entirely passive approach, where the only active component is a randomized chance to get components through a EOM drop, and while I don't particularly have an issue with components dropping, I feel like it is not an accurate representation of my efforts as a player. In short, I don't particularly care in what amount or what metric is used, but players should gain a benefit to their warbarge (may it be component drops, faster cooldowns, ect) for actively playing the game, with the passive Component generation being a supplement on top of that. Additionally it may be nice to further reward players for actually winning matches so they're encouraged to keep trying in situations that turn unfavorable. Buying Subsystems This is part goes along with my previous point of passive vs active gain. If you choose not to spend AUR on you Warbarge, you are almost entirely restricted to a passive gain. However, with AUR you can not only purchase Components, but also completely negate cooldown times. That being said, you can actively buy your way through the entire Warbarge without ever waiting like a non-AUR user would. This strikes me as odd, as even AUR Prototype suits, require the player to actively skill into ADV suits before the AUR Proto suit can be used, which required players actually play the game. However the AUR system for the warbarge effectively allows you to buy 100% of your 'SP' to get to that level, and I think that's wrong. Do I have an issue with purchasing components? Not really. Do I have an issue with using AUR for faster cooldowns? Not really. What I do have an issue with is allowing players to do both, effectively buying their subsystems if they use enough cash to do so. In short, this ties in with my previous point. Ideally I would prefer that the Warbarge produces some components passively, players generate some components actively, and then AUR is exclusively used to speed up cooldowns so players can start working on the next level faster. This again requires players to actually play the game, while still allowing them to speed up their Warbarge upgrades through AUR while preventing them from simply buying everything they want with premium currency. Damage Bonus I've made it clear that I'm really not a fan of an in-battle benefit from the Warbarge, so I won't harp on it again, but I still don't like it. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4787	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:06:00 - [2] - Quote reserved "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4787	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:08:00 - [3] - Quote reserved "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Jadek Menaheim Xer Cloud Consortium 5300	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:19:00 - [4] - Quote Alright Pokey, if a player can farm +19200 (~$53 in AUR) components over waiting two days alt farming, we'll need to figure out how to make actively playing on a single character more lucrative. Neckbeard for Good charity shave
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4536	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:20:00 - [5] - Quote A lot of really good points. I think that active gameplay providing an avenue to upgrade the barge more rapidly would be fair. I think the production of warbarge components could potentially be something that even districts and planetary conquest could have a role in as well. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4794	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:23:00 - [6] - Quote Jadek Menaheim wrote: Alright Pokey, if a player can farm +19200 (~$53 in AUR) components over waiting two days alt farming, we'll need to figure out how to make actively playing on a single character more lucrative. I think dropping the passive down and making it mostly active generation is the way to go. Passive should always be supplemental and not the primary means of production. Alt farming will always exist, that's the nature of the beast in games like this, the important part is limiting the degree by which it happens. Simply put if it you make it so active generation is worth more for the time investment than farming the alts, it's going to encourage players to simply play the game over alt farming. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Cat Merc Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 15001	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:27:00 - [7] - Quote Licks his furr Eww, too much touchy feely, got to get clean of this. Also, reached 15k likes. Yay Cat Merc for C¦¦P¦¦M¦¦9¦¦ CPM Nyan! *Vote 'Keshava' for the new Gallente vehicle name!*
Jadek Menaheim Xer Cloud Consortium 5300	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:27:00 - [8] - Quote Agreeing with Kane. Districts are the production houses for components en-mass, however you'd need to speed command points naturally to extract them. Neckbeard for Good charity shave
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4799	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:30:00 - [9] - Quote Jadek Menaheim wrote: Kane alluded to something in the chat. Components can be the thing districts produce en-mass, however you'd need to speed command points naturally to extract them. That brings up another point I forgot to mention. if memory serves, Ratatti made noises about players being allowed to donate Components to a corp to generate CP. this means that spending AUR will allow a corp to 'buy' CP, which is going to give them a direct and blatant advantage in any system that uses CP such as PC (too many damn acronyms). Which is really REALLY bad. I hate saying it, but that's basically pay to win in that instance. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Jadek Menaheim Xer Cloud Consortium 5301	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:34:00 - [10] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Jadek Menaheim wrote: Kane alluded to something in the chat. Components can be the thing districts produce en-mass, however you'd need to speed command points naturally to extract them. That brings up another point I forgot to mention. if memory serves, Ratatti made noises about players being allowed to donate Components to a corp to generate CP. this means that spending AUR will allow a corp to 'buy' CP, which is going to give them a direct and blatant advantage in any system that uses CP such as PC (too many damn acronyms). Which is really REALLY bad. I hate saying it, but that's basically pay to win in that instance. At this point account farming is going to be a lot more sensible and cheaper than paying with AUR. Two days of waiting with two hours of work, or $50? It's a dynamic that needs to be address. Neckbeard for Good charity shave

Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4802	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:40:00 - [11] - Quote Jadek Menaheim wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Jadek Menaheim wrote: Kane alluded to something in the chat. Components can be the thing districts produce en-mass, however you'd need to speed command points naturally to extract them. That brings up another point I forgot to mention. if memory serves, Ratatti made noises about players being allowed to donate Components to a corp to generate CP. this means that spending AUR will allow a corp to 'buy' CP, which is going to give them a direct and blatant advantage in any system that uses CP such as PC (too many damn acronyms). Which is really REALLY bad. I hate saying it, but that's basically pay to win in that instance. At this point account farming is going to be a lot more sensible and cheaper than paying with AUR. Two days of waiting with two hours of work, or $50? It's a dynamic that needs to be address. Indeed, which is why passive generation of liquid assets is dangerous and has to be approached carefully. Hell you could tie significant rewards of components to Mission Rewards and even FacWar. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2120	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:53:00 - [12] - Quote Pretty good summary. I understand that warbarges are meant for the 'long' game, but I've just spent six days waiting for the components to upgrade my warbarge to level two, and now I'm going to be waiting for two weeks to upgrade my factory to level 2. These are things that are way too far on the spectrum of 'too long'. I'd be more than happy to see 10-15 components earned per match played, at least that feels 'active'. I don't expect to have a fully upgraded warbarge in two weeks time, but I'd like to see the potential for my warbarge to really be something 'more' in say two months time. Also, I'm not particularly fond of the idea of PC generating components, reminds me too much of passive isk generation and that as we all know was abused and prevented people from getting into pc in the first place. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.
Kain Spero Negative-Feedback 4538	Posted - 2015.02.07 22:54:00 - [13] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Jadek Menaheim wrote: Kane alluded to something in the chat. Components can be the thing districts produce en-mass, however you'd need to speed command points naturally to extract them. That brings up another point I forgot to mention. if memory serves, Ratatti made noises about players being allowed to donate Components to a corp to generate CP. this means that spending AUR will allow a corp to 'buy' CP, which is going to give them a direct and blatant advantage in any system that uses CP such as PC (too many damn acronyms). Which is really REALLY bad. I hate saying it, but that's basically pay to win in that instance. I would have to strongly agree with this point. Donating components for CP is an idea that needs to burn in a fire. Owner of Spero Escrow Services Follow @KainSpero for Dust and Legion news
Bright Steel Horizons' Edge 954	Posted - 2015.02.07 23:46:00 - [14] - Quote Very well said OP +10 Dust 514, the BEST WORST game you can't stop playing.
Kierkegaard Soren Corrosive Synergy 707	Posted - 2015.02.08 03:01:00 - [15] - Quote I keep talking about this and it might be getting a bit repetitive now so I do apologise, but components should absolutely be recovered by the winning team of any match as an additional reward. If warbarges are going to be so important to us mercs in the near future then upgrading them should be something that we have to fight hard for. Many of us coast on easy wp earners like uplinks and hacks to earn solid isk and sp payouts with little meaningful regard as to whether we win or lose any given match (PC not withstanding of course), so having the right to claim components after a game that you won will be a powerful incentive to push for that win in the first place. Dedicated Commando. "He who can destroy a thing, controls a thing."
Juno Tristan Obscure Reference 342	Posted - 2015.02.08 06:18:00 - [16] - Quote I would have to agree, the lack of active generation means they're stuck with a system that requires you to log on every other day just to beat the farmers. Another big part of the problem is that the timespan it takes to upgrade your warbarge does not match up to most people's expectations of how long Dust (or the PS3) have left. If they were to explicitly confirm your warbarge progression on Legion or whatever the next iteration is, I would view it much more favourably ADS Ramming Revenge! Should Have Stayed Inside (the Tank)
Kevall Longstride DUST University Ivy League 2411	Posted - 2015.02.08 11:18:00 - [17] - Quote I hope a lot of you read this post by Pokey because it illustrates beautifully exactly the kind of constructive quality feedback we need so we can bring it to CCP's attention. I've kept clear of the forums in the last few days and just read through the various Skype channels I'm in because tensions have been rather high this last week and I thought it best to wait till emotions die down. The reason for this is very simple but some of you won't like it. I've been deeply embarrassed by the attitude of some in the community. The level of vitriolic passive aggressive and just straight out aggressive that's been flung around is frankly unacceptable. And while it could be argued that it's a result of the passion we all share for the game, there has been far too many instances of personal abuse of members of the Dev team wrapped in the cloak of 'alleged' constructive feedback. And having worked closely with these guys closely for months now I can tell you all, without any fear of contradiction, whatever passion you may hold for the game is nothing compared to theirs. They are paid to work on the game, improve it, use feedback from you and the CPM to tighten up aspects of it and try to come up new ways to engage us. They work 24/7 to make the game better for you. They are NOT paid to take personal abuse. No one should have to put up with that and if any of you have thought or expressed an opinion as such in the last few days, you need to take a moment, reflect and if after that you still hold that opinion, then frankly the problem is you. Now the sermon is over... The first stage of Warlords was to get the systems in place in the game, find that they work and what needs tweaking, fixing or just out and out changed. That has happened and is in the process of being worked on. As much as they can test and test again these systems in studio, there is just no way to know how they are going to work in the real world once it hits TQ and thousands of players hammer it. This was also compounded by a technical problem that Ratatti has spoken about when the database in one of the servers was found to be incompatible with the new version of the game. This was unfortunate but there was no way it could be tested first without the game going live. These problems are in the process of being worked on. The game mechanics added to the game in Warlords, both visible and back office, needed to be in place and working correctly for the implementation of PC 2.0 in a later point release. That process is ongoing. As to the various issues that Pokey brought up so eloquently they can be all iterated upon and changed based on constructive feedback. The length of time that it takes to upgrade the Warbarge is likely so long right now for the same reason that the loyalty rank is. The team didn't want everyone to be maxed out right away and removing the sense of progression they'd hope that the feature would bring. But the time required can be altered once it's shown that the mechanic works. Nothing is set in stone. And I'd have thought that many of you would take comfort in the fact that it'll take so long to max it all out. After all, it shows does it not, that the team at CCP see this game has having a long term future? Yes, the PS3 is dying but the fact that we have a mechanic in place that'll see the game beyond the supposed lifespan of the format it's on now should tell you something as to the longevity of the game. But you can dismiss that as me being the glass half full type if you really want to protect and cherish your inner bitter vet. As to the accusations of cash grab with Warlords.. Dust 514 is a free game funded by in game purchases. That much is known to all. But when you sit down and analyse the last two years, the monetisation model for the game has been disjointed and incoherent to say the least. With Warlords I think you'll find that a clear strategy is now in the process of being implemented. The use of components to reduce cool down and their purchase using real money is no different from Gems in Clash of Clans and other popular mobile free to play games. For me at least the goal is clear. 1. Get revenue stream working efficiently 2. Earn money from the game. 3. Use profit to create more content. Now like I said, just the mearest bit of analysis of what's been before should tell you that stage 1 hasn't worked as well as it could in the past and effected stages 2 and 3. The purchase of BPO and boosters was a really short term vision, relying heavily on the collectibility of said BPO. So what happens when everyone has them? Revenue stream stops. The purchase of cool down reduction is the way to go for me. I've been playing Clash of Clans, found it enjoyable and not paid any money. But I know that the price for my cheapness is significantly slower progression. I'd agree that maybe the purchase of components for Aurum rather than just straight use of Aurum for cool down reduction might be problematic in terms of farming alts but that is something that can be worked on further using the kind of constructive feedback that Pokey has given us here. I'd urge you all, to continue his example here and we can all help progress the game in a mature and enlightened way. Thanks. CPM 1 member CEO of DUST University Vist dustcpm.com
Cat Merc Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 15016	Posted - 2015.02.08 13:38:00 - [18] - Quote I would have to reiterate a point that Pokey brought up, Kevall. We only have 5 subsystems, and it takes 3 years (From estimations flying around) to max it out. 3 years for 5 subsystems out of 14. Isn't that asking for slightly too much? Let's compare it to the SP system. Within 2 years of playing this game, I have every single weapon to Proto level, I have my core skills maxed out and I have nearly every single Gallente suit to Prototype level. That's within 2 years, I have nearly maxed out infantry gear I want, and maxed out my specific specialization (Gallente Assault). And that's mostly boosted passive, I almost never ever cap, I don't even remember the last time I did (aside from the current bug). Some players have nearly double my SP at this point. And the biggest insult to injury is that with just 100 dollars (Again, from estimations I've seen flying around), you can bypass it all. 3 years bypassed with 100 dollars. 3 years. To top it all off, this timer locks us from getting a 5% damage boost and Experimental/Officer gear (Kane tells us daily about what he got from the lab, officer gear is common), and you can see why people are not exactly happy. What we have now should not even take half the time, and Aurum should only boost the speed, not make it instant. You cannot stretch out this tiny amount of content over 3 years, this is ridiculous. Cat Merc for C¦¦P¦¦M¦¦9¦¦ CPM Nyan! *Vote 'Keshava' for the new Gallente vehicle name!*
Tesfa Alem Death by Disassociation 825	Posted - 2015.02.08 14:18:00 - [19] - Quote To clarify, DUST 514 isn't a kickstarter project or an indie mobile game. It is CCP who pay their devs salary. What players put into via aurum goes into paying off CCP investment in dust and justifying current work on it, but thats about it. Obviously i agree that Devs and Players are not subject to personal abuse, but thats about as far as my sympathies lie. They want our money, we want their services, as consumers we want as fair a deal as possible. Thats business. Thats where the "Aurlords" come in. The cash investment being asked for side grades is akin to a single purchase triple AAA title. Or wait months / years. 5 months to get the equipment factory online, or under a week if you invest about 50 dollars. It doesn't show me that CCP has a long term plan at all, given how quickly people who drop cash on warbarges gain immediate benifit. benifit. It simply shows me a pretty heafty paywall. The good thing is that, like any business the devs are listening to thier customers and making some changes accordingly. Some will give direct revenue to CCP such as selling the faction skins, quafe logis and commandos in the market instead of soley random drops. Also the strongboxes are getting looked at again. The bad thing is it takes a pretty overwhelming response to get the Devs attention. There is alot of Dev willingness to defend a bad idea to the death, (i.e starter fits and basic skill books in strongboxes is worth AUR because newplayers). A lot of player commentary at the same time, due to the nature of internet anonymity, is downright ugly. Hopefullly more people will have responses like pokey's. But hey the internets a dirty place. Redline for Thee, but no Redline for Me.
Zaria Min Deir 0uter.Heaven 1179	Posted - 2015.02.08 14:35:00 - [20] - Quote Cat Merc wrote: I would have to reiterate a point that Pokey brought up, Kevall. We only have 5 subsystems, and it takes 3 years (From estimations flying around) to max it out. 3 years for 5 subsystems out of 14. Isn't that asking for slightly too much? Let's compare it to the SP system. Within 2 years of playing this game, I have every single weapon to Proto level, I have my core skills maxed out and I have nearly every single Gallente suit to Prototype level. That's within 2 years, I have nearly maxed out infantry gear I want, and maxed out my specific specialization (Gallente Assault). And that's mostly boosted passive, I almost never ever cap, I don't even remember the last time I did (aside from the current bug). Some players have nearly double my SP at this point. And the biggest insult to injury is that with just 100 dollars (Again, from estimations I've seen flying around), you can bypass it all. 3 years bypassed with 100 dollars. 3 years. To top it all off, this timer locks us from getting a 5% damage boost and Experimental/Officer gear (Kane tells us daily about what he got from the lab, officer gear is common), and you can see why people are not exactly happy. What we have now should not even take half the time, and Aurum should only boost the speed, not make it instant. You cannot stretch out this tiny amount of content over 3 years, this is ridiculous. I do believe Kevall tried to address that very point. Kevall Longstride wrote: The length of time that it takes to upgrade the Warbarge is likely so long right now for the same reason that the loyalty rank is. The team didn't want everyone to be maxed out right away and removing the sense of progression they'd hope that the feature would bring. But the time required can be altered once it's shown that the mechanic works. Nothing is set in stone. Sure, adding a new feature like this would be silly if it could be maxed out right away. Ignoring the fact that it can, in fact, be maxed out right away by the use of AUR. However, and this is a big however... There is a difference between giving players stretch goals to create fluff content, and making those goal impossible. Would it really have been so bad to give the community a chance to provide feedback on the warbarges before release? And I mean actual feedback, that could have had some impact on development. We had no idea about the numbers involved in relation to the components. If they had, for instance, given us a rough estimate of generation rates, drop rates, and the amount needed to do various things on the warbarge... People could have done the math for them and gone "hey, we think the time needed to just get those first 5 subsystems is way too high, and if you do release more subsystems later, it will get pretty ridiculous... maybe consider increasing droprates and scaling the upgrade costs down a bit, to start with?" etc. Or, "Hey, are you sure it's agood idea to make it entirely passive, look at the SP system, that also rewards people for actually playing the game, isn't that a trend you'd like to continue?" Instead, people had to get this information by trying to upgrade their warbarge and being told by people who bought it outright how impossible it will be without liberal applications of aur. That is what breeds frustration. And, sure, that frustration might lead to some bitching going on in skype channels, isn't it good that people have an outlet for their frustration that isn't actually seen (at least it shouldn't be) by any devs...? Just like when LOLoyalty ranks were released, we didn't know what the formula CCP would use to calculate it beforehand, so people got confounded and even disappointed by how the system worked, particularly once it was demonstrated how very little effect actual gameplay had on it, as opposed to AUR... Hey, just like the warbarges! It's almost like there's a pattern... Have you considered installing the improved keyboard? "Go Go Power Rangers!"

Jaysyn Larrisen OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1473	Posted - 2015.02.08 15:23:00 - [21] - Quote Kevall Longstride wrote: ....snip.... As to the accusations of cash grab with Warlords.. Dust 514 is a free game funded by in game purchases. That much is known to all. But when you sit down and analyse the last two years, the monetisation model for the game has been disjointed and incoherent to say the least. With Warlords I think you'll find that a clear strategy is now in the process of being implemented. The use of components to reduce cool down and their purchase using real money is no different from Gems in Clash of Clans and other popular mobile free to play games ...snip... Kevall, Well thought out post and you touch on some solid concerns about the tone of the community. I believe the point was made previously that it certainly feels that without some fairly high level of outrage the needle doesn't move with CCP much, that said, could very well be perception gap with the community. That said, I want to address the above excerpt directly. You are correct, the monetization strategy is now very clear. There is a reason that I don't play "Clash of Clans" and similar mobile games...you pay to win. Pay to win can be defined as having to pay for a distinct advantage in game that you normally couldn't get else where or couldn't be obtained in a reasonable amount of time though in-game effort. For all but the most casual player, this game is clearly drifting into that area. When you off AUR only accelerations that directly Impact in-match a advantages owned quickly become necessary items for competitive play...we've hit the pay to win zone. Additionally, Dust514 is NOT a popular mobile free to play game nor should it seek to simply replicate the model in this format. I honestly excepted better as a customer. I have no problem with a working and healthy monetization system...but not the road we seem to be on now. I suppose we could have seen this coming a bit given CCP Rouge's background. As for rumor comment about the lifespan of Dust and future systems it maybe on being foreshadowed by the implied progression / monetization structure I will tell you the same thing i have told, Cross, IWS, SirManBoy, and Soraya...comments like that at this point MUST come from CCP or all they do is sow confusion. Do not get me wrong, I was very interested in your fairly strong implication but until it is said publicly by CCP that's throwing a squirrel to chase in the room. I want CCP to address this if it is in fact part of their current behind the scenes vision and direction to provide clarity to the player (customer) base. Again, I appreciate your commentary but took direct issue with the points above. "Endless money forms the sinews of War." - Cicero Skype: jaysyn.larrisen Twitter: @JaysynLarrisen
Zaria Min Deir 0uter.Heaven 1179	Posted - 2015.02.08 15:56:00 - [22] - Quote Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: ....snip.... As to the accusations of cash grab with Warlords.. Dust 514 is a free game funded by in game purchases. That much is known to all. But when you sit down and analyse the last two years, the monetisation model for the game has been disjointed and incoherent to say the least. With Warlords I think you'll find that a clear strategy is now in the process of being implemented. The use of components to reduce cool down and their purchase using real money is no different from Gems in Clash of Clans and other popular mobile free to play games ...snip... awesome stuff You adressed the other issues I wanted to bring up, but was having a problem wording in a way that couldn't be perceived as hostile by some of the more sensitive potential readers. Thank you Jaysyn. Have you considered installing the improved keyboard? "Go Go Power Rangers!"
Jaysyn Larrisen OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1473	Posted - 2015.02.08 17:32:00 - [23] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: ....snip.... As to the accusations of cash grab with Warlords.. Dust 514 is a free game funded by in game purchases. That much is known to all. But when you sit down and analyse the last two years, the monetisation model for the game has been disjointed and incoherent to say the least. With Warlords I think you'll find that a clear strategy is now in the process of being implemented. The use of components to reduce cool down and their purchase using real money is no different from Gems in Clash of Clans and other popular mobile free to play games ...snip... awesome stuff You adressed the other issues I wanted to bring up, but was having a problem wording in a way that couldn't be perceived as hostile by some of the more sensitive potential readers. Thank you Jaysyn. Just trying to help. "Endless money forms the sinews of War." - Cicero Skype: jaysyn.larrisen Twitter: @JaysynLarrisen
Kevall Longstride DUST University Ivy League 2415	Posted - 2015.02.08 18:14:00 - [24] - Quote Again I'll reiterate, there is nothing here that can't be altered tweaked or changed provided it's done after constructive feedback. As to accusations of pay to win now. I guess my definition of what is pay to win is different from others. My understanding of pay to win is providing for the paying customer only, a benefit that can not be grinded out from the game given time. An example of that would be a gun that has 200% more DPS than any other in the game or a suit that has 4000 hp and can only be purchased directly using real money. That to me, is pay to win. What Clash of Clans, Star Wars Commander, other mobile phone games, World of Planes, H1Z1 and Dust 514 amongst other have to Pay to Progress. There is no element in the game that can't be earned through time and effort. Now that definition is something that others will take issue with perhaps but while there is no element to the game that can't be earned with grind alone, my position is that Dust 514 is not pay to win. Simply saying that it is over and over again does not make it so. I have my Warbarge to Level five, all but one of the subsystems are level two or one, with the augmented ammo to level 3. And with that I'm perfectly happy to cough up the -ú40 of Aurum to do it. The rest I'll leave to the grind. I do not consider this pay to win as it was my option to do and if someone wants to cough up -ú100 to max it out fair play to them and more money to CCP to use for further game development. Now is three years too long to leave it to grind alone? Probably. Can that be changed? Most definitely. Should it be instant cool down with Aurum? Probably not. Should paying for quicker progress in principal not be a option? Definitely not. It's an established and successful business model that virtually every other free to play game now employs. What is it that means that Dust 514 should be exempt from such notions as CCP earning some money? Nothing from what I can see. It needs tweaking, a nip and tuck here and there, which with your help can done constructively. Now you can accuse me of being a corporate creature if you wish, a toady of CCP perhaps. But if CCP went pay to win as I percieve it with 'golden' ammo or 'golden suits', believe me, they'll get a mouthful and a half from not only myself but the rest of the CPM. But I'm not going to get in the way of them legitimately earning money from the game especially as I know how important that is for continued development of the game. Nor would it be my place to do so. Speaking for myself now, it's now just about finding a balance between the needs of CCP as a business to pay for development and server coasts and the needs of the player base to not feel like they're being taken for a ride. That balance isn't yet there but it's certainly within reach now, much more so than it has been since July when CPM1 took office. Dust 514 might be free to play but it most certainly is not free to make. CPM 1 member CEO of DUST University Vist dustcpm.com
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4847	Posted - 2015.02.08 18:23:00 - [25] - Quote Thank you for the responses Kevall and everyone else. I think they key point I'd like to hammer in regards to "P2W" is that people truly do not mind free to play games encouraging players to spend money on the game so that the game can persist. It's generally accepted by everyone that CCP needs to make money, and that's not the problem; the problem lies in the exact metric that they use to generate such income. Typically before, AUR items required you to play the game 'normally' to reach a certain point before you could use the item (Training a suit to 3 before using the PRO AUR variant for example), or simply cosmetic/low end BPOs that offered a benefit for lower end play. The only way to 'buy' SP was through boosters, and while this offered a conceivable advantage, you really had to still play the game to make proper use of them. Nothing was ever 'bought' right out of the gate and it still took in-game effort to really get the most out of your AUR. The fact of the matter is that in a free to play game, not spending cash will always hold with it a general sense of dissatisfaction, as the game wants to encourage you to spend money in order to be more satisfied. However, this is a dangerous balancing act as it is dependent on "How dissatisfied will not paying make you" and the difference with "How much additional satisfaction will paying bring". If that ratio grows too large, you start to get people becoming bitter because they see their choice to not pay as having increasingly more relative dissatisfaction. Once that happens you start to hear things like 'pay to win' and 'cash grab'. Now of course people will complain that releasing skins and things like that are a 'cash grab' and maybe they are but it doesnt matter because they don't affect the game. The release of the Loyalty System was neat and all, and people were upset because AUR had such a large weight in determining your rank, but at the same time while it offered some benefit, loyalty rank was largely unimportant, so it didn't really matter. The issue comes back to the Warbarge. The playerbase perceives the Warbarge as the central feature of Warlords. We felt it was going to be an important, integral part of the the game...perhaps not right away, but it would become that. The issue however is that we have now deviated from the "You still have to do things in-game to take full benefit in spending AUR" and moved to a system where you can purchase your subsystems with zero wait, and zero time invested in the game. It has created a situation where you can either "Wait a REALLY long time to get anything out of your warbarge" or "Buy it all and get it instantly". Do you see how that ratio I mentioned earlier has sharply expanded? That's why people are reacting so negatively. If the Warbarge was just another fluff feature like the Loyalty Rank...it would not be an issue. But if the Warbarge is to have any substantial meaning at all, may that be manufacturing, PC benefit, ect. this sort of "Buy what you want with AUR or watch a timer tick away if you don't open your wallet" mentality is going to be nothing but toxic to the community, and it's just going to drive people away. The thing is....all of this is actually pretty readily fixable, and really would not require a ton of programming to pull off. Players should generate components while playing the game so they feel like they can do something beside watch a timer Players should have a reward for winning, this could be tied to the above point Either remove the ability to purchase Components with AUR, or remove the ability to speed up cooldown with AUR. I would highly suggest the former over the latter. This will instantly create a situation where players feel like playing for free still has an added benefit, and lessens the benefit from spending AUR, thus shrinking that "Free to Play" ratio I mentioned. It still offers clear benefit for using AUR, while letting players be engaged and feel like even if they don't spend AUR that they can still DO something in regards to the warbarge...not just wait around for things to upgrade. As I said before, there is a reason the Hybrid Active/Passive skill system feels pretty good in Dust....the Warbarge should follow its lead and do the same. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Kevall Longstride DUST University Ivy League 2416	Posted - 2015.02.08 18:29:00 - [26] - Quote Thanks again to Pokey for his continued feedback. The CPM and CCP are already having detailed discussion as to how the system can be iterated upon to address the legitimate concerns that some have expressed. We will hopefully be able to speak more as to those discussions once an agreed course of action is in place. CPM 1 member CEO of DUST University Vist dustcpm.com
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4847	Posted - 2015.02.08 18:32:00 - [27] - Quote Kevall Longstride wrote: Thanks again to Pokey for his continued feedback. The CPM and CCP are already having detailed discussion as to how the system can be iterated upon to address the legitimate concerns that some have expressed. We will hopefully be able to speak more as to those discussions once an agreed course of action is in place. Good to hear. Maintain transparency and people will be far nicer to you guys and CCP "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Zaria Min Deir 0uter.Heaven 1187	Posted - 2015.02.08 19:58:00 - [28] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: EDIT: Also note that while I am aware that you can get components to drop randomly...that's too reliant on RNG. There needs to be a way to consistently generate a slow but steady flow of components from playing the game. If you want to keep the large chunk of components as a random drop, that's fine by me. Also, to underline... while even random drops could by some be considered "active" generation... the drop rates would have to be actually reasonable, which they are nowhere near. And randomness in this is really unnecessary, IMHO. Playing the game should reward you with components, playing to WIN even more so. Have you considered installing the improved keyboard? "Go Go Power Rangers!"
Jaysyn Larrisen OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 1476	Posted - 2015.02.08 20:30:00 - [29] - Quote Kevall, pokey, et all... "Saying it is so over and over again simply does not make it so." Please note that this ascertation could equally be applied to your (Kevall's) definition of P2W and areas of commentary. Honestly I'm all for a healthy monetization of Dust. Healthy is a somewhat defined by where you sit in the process and most of the concern is being genereated by those in the customer side of the equation. As Pokey noted a component of this is transparency...just a bit of plain up front communication. I'm personally at the point where I think would simply prefer a subscription similar to what I pay for with my EVE accounts as far as monetization models. The shaping and alignment of the game to the current monetization model is quite indicative of many of the things that drove me away from quite a few other games. I'm fairly confident with positive interaction (in both directions) there can be an optimal solution arrived at for some model. I'm re-evaluating my level of support to Dust 514 - no this isn't a "fix mah stuffz or I'll quit!" type comment. I have no more information than the average player that pays attention to goings on and that's the sum of data / information that I can base decisions on as a customer. I don't have the inside baseball of the CPM and the Dust Dev team as good as they are in communicating about granular in-game matters rarely communicate about the game in longer term matters. To Rattati's credit, I honestly believe he would be a quite transparent and forthright if he were allowed to do so. I'm simply stating that I'm personally not prepared to put real money down, particularly in the current monetization structure, based on the overall information environment. This is juxtaposed by my desire to actually support the game that I do sincerely wish gets off the ground as we all wanted it to. "Endless money forms the sinews of War." - Cicero Skype: jaysyn.larrisen Twitter: @JaysynLarrisen
MINA Longstrike Kirjuun Heiian 2125	Posted - 2015.02.08 20:36:00 - [30] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: Thanks again to Pokey for his continued feedback. The CPM and CCP are already having detailed discussion as to how the system can be iterated upon to address the legitimate concerns that some have expressed. We will hopefully be able to speak more as to those discussions once an agreed course of action is in place. Good to hear. Maintain transparency and people will be far nicer to you guys and CCP EDIT: Also note that while I am aware that you can get components to drop randomly...that's too reliant on RNG. There needs to be a way to consistently generate a slow but steady flow of components from playing the game. If you want to keep the large chunk of components as a random drop, that's fine by me. I had a conversation with a friend about this last night, and one of his initial reactions was based upon the premise of generating one warbarge component per minute of gameplay. It sounded crazy at first, that someone who played for five hours worth of matches straight could get 300 components, but then after a bit of thought he went "Well, not everyone plays that much... and those that do are actually very invested in the game". It would feel much like the current SP system where your character growth is largely determined by your actions as a player. Even if it was two thirds of that (one component for every 1m30s in match) to prevent 'grinding' it would still feel relevant and meaningful to your growth as a player for actually PLAYING the game. Hnolai ki tuul, ti sei oni a tiu. Kirjuun Heiian. I have a few alts.

Cat Merc Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 15030	Posted - 2015.02.08 20:54:00 - [31] - Quote Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: Kevall, pokey, et all... "Saying it is so over and over again simply does not make it so." Please note that this ascertation could equally be applied to your (Kevall's) definition of P2W and areas of commentary. Honestly I'm all for a healthy monetization of Dust. Healthy is a somewhat defined by where you sit in the process and most of the concern is being genereated by those in the customer side of the equation. As Pokey noted a component of this is transparency...just a bit of plain up front communication. I'm personally at the point where I think would simply prefer a subscription similar to what I pay for with my EVE accounts as far as monetization models. The shaping and alignment of the game to the current monetization model is quite indicative of many of the things that drove me away from quite a few other games. I'm fairly confident with positive interaction (in both directions) there can be an optimal solution arrived at for some model. I'm re-evaluating my level of support to Dust 514 - no this isn't a "fix mah stuffz or I'll quit!" type comment. I have no more information than the average player that pays attention to goings on and that's the sum of data / information that I can base decisions on as a customer. I don't have the inside baseball of the CPM and the Dust Dev team as good as they are in communicating about granular in-game matters rarely communicate about the game in longer term matters. To Rattati's credit, I honestly believe he would be a quite transparent and forthright if he were allowed to do so. I'm simply stating that I'm personally not prepared to put real money down, particularly in the current monetization structure, based on the overall information environment. This is juxtaposed by my desire to actually support the game that I do sincerely wish gets off the ground as we all wanted it to. You have summed up my feelings pretty well. Cat Merc for C¦¦P¦¦M¦¦9¦¦ CPM Nyan! *Vote 'Keshava' for the new Gallente vehicle name!*
Cat Merc Fatal Absolution General Tso's Alliance 15030	Posted - 2015.02.08 20:56:00 - [32] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: Thanks again to Pokey for his continued feedback. The CPM and CCP are already having detailed discussion as to how the system can be iterated upon to address the legitimate concerns that some have expressed. We will hopefully be able to speak more as to those discussions once an agreed course of action is in place. Good to hear. Maintain transparency and people will be far nicer to you guys and CCP EDIT: Also note that while I am aware that you can get components to drop randomly...that's too reliant on RNG. There needs to be a way to consistently generate a slow but steady flow of components from playing the game. If you want to keep the large chunk of components as a random drop, that's fine by me. I had a conversation with a friend about this last night, and one of his initial reactions was based upon the premise of generating one warbarge component per minute of gameplay. It sounded crazy at first, that someone who played for five hours worth of matches straight could get 300 components, but then after a bit of thought he went "Well, not everyone plays that much... and those that do are actually very invested in the game". It would feel much like the current SP system where your character growth is largely determined by your actions as a player. Even if it was two thirds of that (one component for every 1m30s in match) to prevent 'grinding' it would still feel relevant and meaningful to your growth as a player for actually PLAYING the game. If you actually do the math, it's still incredibly slow. Not even the SP system is that slow. 50 components a match is honestly closer to the SP system. Cat Merc for C¦¦P¦¦M¦¦9¦¦ CPM Nyan! *Vote 'Keshava' for the new Gallente vehicle name!*
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4855	Posted - 2015.02.09 00:51:00 - [33] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: Thanks again to Pokey for his continued feedback. The CPM and CCP are already having detailed discussion as to how the system can be iterated upon to address the legitimate concerns that some have expressed. We will hopefully be able to speak more as to those discussions once an agreed course of action is in place. Good to hear. Maintain transparency and people will be far nicer to you guys and CCP EDIT: Also note that while I am aware that you can get components to drop randomly...that's too reliant on RNG. There needs to be a way to consistently generate a slow but steady flow of components from playing the game. If you want to keep the large chunk of components as a random drop, that's fine by me. I had a conversation with a friend about this last night, and one of his initial reactions was based upon the premise of generating one warbarge component per minute of gameplay. I don't really care exactly what metric is used, what I care about is twofold. 1. It's not AFK farmable, that would make the gesture completely pointless. 2. It's actually an amount that correlates well to the performance and amount of effort put forth And like Jaysyn said, it's difficult for me to maintain the level of excitement that I initially had about Dust given some of the recent choices in monetization. I've always been a proponent of monetization as it allows the game to continue on, and I was fine with this because I never felt like I NEEDED to spend money even if I chose to anyways. It's a matter of perception. However, CCP claims that they 'don't want people just burning through all of the levels of the Warbarge in the first week' and I completely agree with that. However, with enough AUR, you can do exactly that. I mean just look at Kane's thread where he dumped a ton of cash onto the game just to show exactly what money can buy (which is basically everything in the Warbarge). "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Match Omega D3ATH CARD RUST415 9	Posted - 2015.02.09 08:55:00 - [34] - Quote MINA Longstrike wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: Thanks again to Pokey for his continued feedback. The CPM and CCP are already having detailed discussion as to how the system can be iterated upon to address the legitimate concerns that some have expressed. We will hopefully be able to speak more as to those discussions once an agreed course of action is in place. Good to hear. Maintain transparency and people will be far nicer to you guys and CCP EDIT: Also note that while I am aware that you can get components to drop randomly...that's too reliant on RNG. There needs to be a way to consistently generate a slow but steady flow of components from playing the game. If you want to keep the large chunk of components as a random drop, that's fine by me. I had a conversation with a friend about this last night, and one of his initial reactions was based upon the premise of generating one warbarge component per minute of gameplay. It sounded crazy at first, that someone who played for five hours worth of matches straight could get 300 components, but then after a bit of thought he went "Well, not everyone plays that much... and those that do are actually very invested in the game". It would feel much like the current SP system where your character growth is largely determined by your actions as a player. Even if it was two thirds of that (one component for every 1m30s in match) to prevent 'grinding' it would still feel relevant and meaningful to your growth as a player for actually PLAYING the game. after reading this I thought why not give components after every battle kind of like sp and isk, also make components buyable with isk
ZDub 303 Internal Error. Negative-Feedback 3370	Posted - 2015.02.09 14:23:00 - [35] - Quote i've not actually played with the new mechanics but I did want to pop in and comment: Clash of Clans... my god... its literally the most pay to win game there is. Go look at the top 10000 on the leaderboards, none of those guys got there without paying about 1k USD per month on boosters and instant builds. Not to mention the hundreds they have to spend every patch to instant build the new upgrades as they come out because you absolutely cannot wait or have any towers down for upgrades or you'll get slaughtered right off the leaderboards. Here is an interview from Jorge Yao about having to spend around $250 per week to maintain leaderboard status. Its nuts... http://www.polygon.com/2013/12/23/5237992/number-one-clash-of-clans-player-used-the-game-to-combat-loneliness Now, that's not to say that warbarges should have some sort of monetization aspect, you have to right? its a free to play game. I am okay with instant build mechanics as long as its absurdly expensive, its a pool for whales to swim in and i'm okay that. However, in this instance I think some small tweaks could have saved everyone a lot of heartache. First, a WC booster which increases component generation by 50% would be step one. The booster mechanics in dust where spot as far as im concerned, they gave you a boost but limited that boost over time so it doesn't feel like pay to win. Second, you NEED a way for active play to overcome pay mechanics. That's how you maintain content, people who pay can keep up and spend less time playing but the free players are on all the time to continue to provide content for the monetizers. Good, okay so thats a quick fix... I think we have a very rare opportunity to change how players think about Pub matches. My suggestion would be to reward more components to the winners of a pub match, much much more components. Like a 90/10 split between winners and losers. We should really reinforce the desire to win a pub match and do so through expending ISK to get it. Kevall if you see this and you feel like answering I have a question: If, for example, we had an Officer +1 rifle and it was sold for 300 AUR per weapon or 3 billion isk per weapon, do you consider that pay to win?
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4876	Posted - 2015.02.09 15:42:00 - [36] - Quote ZDub 303 wrote: However, in this instance I think some small tweaks could have saved everyone a lot of heartache. First, a WC booster which increases component generation by 50% would be step one. The booster mechanics in dust where spot as far as im concerned, they gave you a boost but limited that boost over time so it doesn't feel like pay to win. Honestly that might be a very solid idea. Remove Ability to buy Components with AUR Add Components as EoM rewards (Frequently drops in salvage) Sell Component Production Booster for AUR to increase passive production +1 "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Zaria Min Deir 0uter.Heaven 1191	Posted - 2015.02.09 15:47:00 - [37] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: However, in this instance I think some small tweaks could have saved everyone a lot of heartache. First, a WC booster which increases component generation by 50% would be step one. The booster mechanics in dust where spot as far as im concerned, they gave you a boost but limited that boost over time so it doesn't feel like pay to win. Honestly that might be a very solid idea. Remove Ability to buy Components with AUR Add Components as EoM rewards (Frequently drops in salvage) Sell Component Production Booster for AUR to increase passive production +1 Agreed, as long as "frequently drops in salvage" is pretty much 100% drop chance for at least the winning team, quantities can be varied, but the droprate should be consistent. Have you considered installing the improved keyboard? "Go Go Power Rangers!"
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4876	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:20:00 - [38] - Quote Zaria Min Deir wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: ZDub 303 wrote: However, in this instance I think some small tweaks could have saved everyone a lot of heartache. First, a WC booster which increases component generation by 50% would be step one. The booster mechanics in dust where spot as far as im concerned, they gave you a boost but limited that boost over time so it doesn't feel like pay to win. Honestly that might be a very solid idea. Remove Ability to buy Components with AUR Add Components as EoM rewards (Frequently drops in salvage) Sell Component Production Booster for AUR to increase passive production +1 Agreed, as long as "frequently drops in salvage" is pretty much 100% drop chance for at least the winning team, quantities can be varied, but the droprate should be consistent. Yep, I talked about this a bit on Biomassed last night. Playing the game should feel rewarding, and watching a timer tick away does not feel rewarding. Ideally, players should be getting components in nearly all if not every match they play. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Ripley Riley Incorruptibles 7653	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:25:00 - [39] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: Playing the game should feel rewarding, and watching a timer tick away does not feel rewarding. Ideally, players should be getting components in nearly all if not every match they play. Winners get warbarge components? Would reduce the incentive to AFK a bit. "You don't want McSyphilis. Don't nobody want McSyphilis." - One Eyed King
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4877	Posted - 2015.02.09 16:41:00 - [40] - Quote Ripley Riley wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: Playing the game should feel rewarding, and watching a timer tick away does not feel rewarding. Ideally, players should be getting components in nearly all if not every match they play. Winners get warbarge components? Would reduce the incentive to AFK a bit. That would be my ideal situation, though I think that's a bit more work than a hotfix. Upping the droprate is totally hotfixable so that should be done ASAP, with perhaps a move to a higher/lower reward for win/loss later down the line. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net

Gyn Wallace OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 220	Posted - 2015.02.09 19:00:00 - [41] - Quote Kevall Longstride wrote: It's an established and successful business model that virtually every other free to play game now employs. What is it that means that Dust 514 should be exempt from such notions as CCP earning some money? Nothing from what I can see. That's always struck me as a dangerous kind of reasoning to guide game design. Imitating other games, without outperforming them somehow, seems like a recipe for failure. CCP's success was in building a weird niche of a game, with unheard of longevity catering to an oddly vicious player base. Eve Online's plex system, which allows some players to play for free, some to pay a subscription, and some to use real money to gain isk by subsidizing the free players; is pretty much PERFECTION. Eve's market, economy and industrial system; the best in any game I've ever played. Failing to capitalize upon CCP's strengths, like the plex system, and imitating more "normal" games is a decision I don't understand. There are lots of things I don't understand though. Marketing, for example. Keeping players, who would multiply your development resources, in the dark (so that you can surprise them with aspects of your new content) doesn't make any sense to me. I'd think the value of improving your game and avoiding missteps would wildly outweigh whatever buzz or novelty you'd sacrifice by taking full advantage of the kind of people who routinely post good ideas in these forums. It wouldn't even sacrifice much novelty or buzz among the majority of players who don't read the forums. Eve's test server is a corresponding example of CCP doing something superbly. Its features aren't a surprise when released to tranquility, but CCP gets relatively inexpensive Quality Assurance of a higher quality and lower price than just about any other game company. I'd love to hear the reasons against a similarly transparent development cycle for Dust. Why hasn't the example of Ratatti's weapon fine tuning (with lots of feedback from the players) expanded that kind of transparency and community usefulness? Are the current warbarg component costs/level, cooldowns, and subsystem upgrade published anywhere? The Dust/Eve Isk Exchange Thread
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4883	Posted - 2015.02.09 19:14:00 - [42] - Quote Gyn Wallace wrote: Eve Online's plex system, which allows some players to play for free, some to pay a subscription, and some to use real money to gain isk by subsidizing the free players; is pretty much PERFECTION. Eve's market, economy and industrial system; the best in any game I've ever played. Failing to capitalize upon CCP's strengths, like the plex system, and imitating more "normal" games is a decision I don't understand. Yes. Totally nailed it Gyn. +1 obviously Dust does not have a subscription, so a direct translation isn't possible, but the concepts in a general sense still remain very valid. Player Trading/Economy negates any "Pay to Win" from AUR Dropsuits/Weapons/Gear/Items as they instantly become available for ISK, through other players. In a way Your Boosters are PLEX in a certain sense, and if tradable removes that Pay to Win argument as well. The purchase of premium items for cash and then allowing players to sell them to other players for ISK, has existed in EVE and has been very successful for a very long time. Player Trading is on the roadmap, and will greatly reduce this "P2W" mentality because players will no longer be forced to pay AUR to get premium items...they'll just pay ISK for other players to fork out the AUR. CCP still gets paid, AUR buyer gets ISK, and ISK user gets AUR items. It's an awesome system so I look forward to that. The obvious ugly duckling here is the Warbarge, but I wont be a broken record and repeat what I've said several times already. I think players in general agree on what needs to happen to make the Warbarge more enjoyable, both in terms of monetization and playability. It's in CCP's hands now to make it happen. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Thor Odinson42 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 6056	Posted - 2015.02.09 20:21:00 - [43] - Quote Jaysyn Larrisen wrote: Kevall Longstride wrote: ....snip.... As to the accusations of cash grab with Warlords.. Dust 514 is a free game funded by in game purchases. That much is known to all. But when you sit down and analyse the last two years, the monetisation model for the game has been disjointed and incoherent to say the least. With Warlords I think you'll find that a clear strategy is now in the process of being implemented. The use of components to reduce cool down and their purchase using real money is no different from Gems in Clash of Clans and other popular mobile free to play games ...snip... Kevall, Well thought out post and you touch on some solid concerns about the tone of the community. I believe the point was made previously that it certainly feels that without some fairly high level of outrage the needle doesn't move with CCP much, however, this could very well be perception gap with the community. That said, I want to address the above excerpt directly. You are correct, the monetization strategy is now very clear. There is a reason that I don't play "Clash of Clans" and similar mobile games...you pay to win. Pay to win can be defined as having to pay for a distinct advantage in game that you normally couldn't get else where or couldn't be obtained in a reasonable amount of time though in-game effort. For all but the most casual player, this game is clearly drifting into that area. When you offer AUR only accelerations that directly Impact in-match advantages and larger scale reasources generated quickly become necessary items for competitive play...we've hit the pay to win zone. Additionally, Dust514 is NOT a popular mobile free to play game nor should it seek to simply replicate the model in this format. I honestly excepted better as a customer. I have no problem with a working and healthy monetization system...but not the road we seem to be on now. I suppose we could have seen this coming a bit given CCP Rouge's background. As for rumor comment about the lifespan of Dust and future systems it maybe on being foreshadowed by the implied progression / monetization structure I will tell you the same thing i have told, Cross, IWS, SirManBoy, and Soraya...comments like that at this point MUST come from CCP or all they do is sow confusion. Do not get me wrong, I was very interested in your fairly strong implication but until it is said publicly by CCP that's throwing a squirrel to chase in the room. I want CCP to address this if it is in fact part of their current behind the scenes vision and direction to provide clarity to the player (customer) base. Again, I appreciate your commentary but took direct issue with the points above. Edited for atrocious ipad typos. To me the monetization strategy seems like someone threw a bunch of *** at the wall to see what sticks. The strongboxes/keys and the warbarge stuff don't work together in any way. The warbarge progression is 200+ days just to go from L4 to L5 with your factory and your lab. Once you've done that you can still only use the lab every other day, if you use it that much you won't be able to upgrade your warbarge any further. If you wanted to take some other module from L4 to L5 (after taking the factory to L5) you are looking at 86 days, but during that time you can't use your lab at all. If they don't add any other modules at all you are looking at nearly two years to get the 5 existing modules to L5 and that's without spending any of the components. A person is expected to log in at least once every 2 days to redeem the components and just wait. I'm selling Templar Codes. 2 of 5 remaining. 225 mil ISK. Message me in game.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4889	Posted - 2015.02.09 20:29:00 - [44] - Quote You know if you think about it, the current Mobile Factory and Warbarge remind me a lot of the old EVE Learing skills, the skills that would increase passive SP generation rate? You pretty much would sign up for EVE, set the skill queue up to train those skills, and then come back a month+ later at level 5, because training anything before optimizing your SP/day rate was basically a waste of time. There is a reason they removed those skills "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Thor Odinson42 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 6056	Posted - 2015.02.09 20:54:00 - [45] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: You know if you think about it, the current Mobile Factory and Warbarge remind me a lot of the old EVE Learing skills, the skills that would increase passive SP generation rate? You pretty much would sign up for EVE, set the skill queue up to train those skills, and then come back a month+ later at level 5, because training anything before optimizing your SP/day rate was basically a waste of time. There is a reason they removed those skills I think a better comparison is PI skills that take more than 2 years to max out. You've got your high tech lab that is producing 6 items per day. You passively accrue the resource needed to finish the process, but you only passively accrue 60% of the necessary resources. The choice you have to make is to waste your production every other day or purchase the resource with AUR. You'd have to add in that the PI skills required you to log in every 2 days to capture them in order to continue skilling it up. I'd love for them to introduce a mechanic like this in Eve. I'd pay $20 just to see the forum posts. I'm selling Templar Codes. 2 of 5 remaining. 225 mil ISK. Message me in game.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4892	Posted - 2015.02.09 21:11:00 - [46] - Quote This is why passive component generation should be the lesser of total generation, with the majority being active. If most of my components come from active gameplay, I have far fewer issues with leveling up the passive factory, because its production rate is not a massive portion (if not all) of my production. I fear that CCP may be trying to cater a bit too much to those who can't play often. I get that people have lives, myself included, and cant play as much as they would like. I think some passive benefit and a cap on active benefit are great for people who can't play as much...but staking 100% of it into passive completely devalues the effort of those who can play often. This is why Hybrid systems work best. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Thor Odinson42 Molon Labe. General Tso's Alliance 6056	Posted - 2015.02.09 21:13:00 - [47] - Quote Pokey Dravon wrote: This is why passive component generation should be the lesser of total generation, with the majority being active. If most of my components come from active gameplay, I have far fewer issues with leveling up the passive factory, because its production rate is not a massive portion (if not all) of my production. I fear that CCP may be trying to cater a bit too much to those who can't play often. I get that people have lives, myself included, and cant play as much as they would like. I think some passive benefit and a cap on active benefit are great for people who can't play as much...but staking 100% of it into passive completely devalues the effort of those who can play often. This is why Hybrid systems work best. If they gave you 50 WBCs for a win it would be the best thing that ever happened to pubs. I'm selling Templar Codes. 2 of 5 remaining. 225 mil ISK. Message me in game.
Pokey Dravon OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 4892	Posted - 2015.02.09 21:20:00 - [48] - Quote Thor Odinson42 wrote: Pokey Dravon wrote: This is why passive component generation should be the lesser of total generation, with the majority being active. If most of my components come from active gameplay, I have far fewer issues with leveling up the passive factory, because its production rate is not a massive portion (if not all) of my production. I fear that CCP may be trying to cater a bit too much to those who can't play often. I get that people have lives, myself included, and cant play as much as they would like. I think some passive benefit and a cap on active benefit are great for people who can't play as much...but staking 100% of it into passive completely devalues the effort of those who can play often. This is why Hybrid systems work best. If they gave you 50 WBCs for a win it would be the best thing that ever happened to pubs. Hell it might even be worth looking at the Passive vs Active ratios for the SP system and building WBC production roughly off of that. "That little s**t Pokey..." --CCP Rattati, Biomassed Episode 032 Dust514 // Podcast www.biomassed.net
Vell0cet OSG Planetary Operations Covert Intervention 2768	Posted - 2015.02.10 07:41:00 - [49] - Quote One way to improve things would be to sell components for LP. In this way, you get more for winning, and components would require significant investment to acquire actively, but is still infinitely more attainable for the player who doesn't want to spend AUR. It will drive vets into those matches more, while making pubs a little better for the new player for a couple reasons: fewer vets in pubs and the ones who are there are more likely to be wearing cheap fits, so they can earn ISK to fund FW. As far as the overall business model goes, I completely agree that EVE's model is perfect. Boosters are the natural analog to PLEX. Ideally we could have a true market, so supply/demand would determine the price of boosters. Also, we could then delete all of the BPC AUR gear from the database. Players could buy boosters from CCP; sell them to other players for ISK; and then use that to buy the LP versions of weapons so they can still get that early access for $$$. It would clean up a ton of redundancy in the database that seems to always be a source of bugs/errors. It would also radically clean up the market UI with the duplication and AUR complexity removed. I also thought of the learning skills in EVE with the mobile factory. Best PvE idea ever!


Pages: 1 2 :: [one page]

COPYRIGHT NOTICE
EVE Online/DUST514, the EVE/DUST514 logo, EVE/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs are the intellectual property of CCP hf. All artwork, screenshots, characters, vehicles, storylines, world facts or other recognizable features of the intellectual property relating to these trademarks are likewise the intellectual property of CCP hf. EVE Online and the EVE logo are the registered trademarks of CCP hf. All rights are reserved worldwide. All other trademarks are the property of their respective owners. CCP hf. has granted permission to OMG Labs to use EVE Online/DUST514 and all associated logos and designs for promotional and information purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not in any way affiliated with, OMG Labs. CCP is in no way responsible for the content on or functioning of this website, nor can it be liable for any damage arising from the use of this website.